The Temasek Times yesterday reported that the Singapore Education Ministry has been alerted to the City Harvest Church carrying out proselytizing activities (dakwah) in schools.

A concerned parent had appealed to the Education Minister to act decisively on curbing the influence exerted by mega churches on Singaporean youths who are the group most vulnerable to cults.

Hannah Yeoh on stage with Rev. Kong Hee

Mind manipulators

“certain persons and groups have been termed ‘compliance professionals’ — high pressure salespersons, con artists, advertisers, fund raisers and other people who have become skillful at employing some fundamental psychologic principles that underlie the influence process”

Mega churches spreading in SE Asia

Below is a screenshot of the ‘About Us’ webpage of Subang Jaya’s City Harvest Church.

Note that this Subang Jaya church also proclaims the academic title “Dr Kong Hee” with regard to its founder.

The church claims that he was awarded an honorary doctorate in Business Administration from “the prestigious Hansei University, South Korea” in 2008.

Hansei is a small, private university set up by the evangelical church.

According to its website, “The University originally started its mission as the Full Gospel Theological College and changed its name to Soonshin University. In 1997, the name was again changed to Hansei University.”

Its chancellor is said to be the pastor of the Yoido Full Gospel Church, which according to the Hansei wesbite, “is the largest church in the world” (reflecting the South Korea mega churches phenomenon).

The Hansei University website also said, “more than 8,000 students have graduated, going to evangelize Korea and the World”.

Is the reverend’s doctorate dodgy?

At issue is not the Hansei honorary PhD in business admin but his theological ones.

The bona fide of Kong Hee’s reputed degrees in divinity from New Covenant International University (NCIU) is being hotly debated in Singapore.

The Channel News Asia forum has been discussing whether NCIU, which offers distance-learning programmes, is merely a degree mill.

Local English media, in particular The Star, have buried the City Harvest Church story.

Why has such a big Singapore story with a local connection (Subang Jaya) not been explored by the MCA-owned newspaper? After all, the scandal ought to be of grave concern to The Star‘s English-speaking readership comprising in part of Anglophiles and charismatic Christians.

It’s beginning to look like this omission is deliberate in order to shield the evangelist faction in the DAP from bad publicity.

MCA risks being viewed as problematic to BN

The Star‘s subversion is posing a thorny problem not only to its owner Huaren (the MCA investment arm) but to the Barisan Nasional as well.

Deputy BN chairman Muhyiddin Yassin today openly called on component parties in the coalition to pull their weight in the coming general election and not just rely on Umno.

Umno is clearly losing patience with MCA and how not to when the ex-Star NUJ president can exchange “Big Mama“-“hu hu hu” tweets with Hannah Yeoh knowing the Star bosses’ legendary indifference.

MCA must stop relying on the pro-establishment Malay blogosphere to counter opposition attacks against the party and instead compel its own mainstream media machinery to immediately start pulling their weight!

Not only is it Umno that’s losing patience with MCA but Malay bloggers too. Should another DUMC, apostasy case affecting Muslim(s) or Ramadan pork ribs fiasco recur, the backlash in Malay blogosphere will be more severe this time around.

Whatever shreds of goodwill left for MCA among the BN’s non-Chinese supporters is fast dissipating due to the Gunting dalam Lipatan laxity – if not outright treachery – that the Chinese party allows its Christian newspaper to get away with.

The guy must be blind for not being able to see the point that is glaring in the face of anyone who cares to open his god-given eyes to see. It must be a case of selective vision which had been self-inflicted by DAPsters in general.

I am afraid MCA is still dreaming. Its reluctance to fight DAP is mind boggling, knowing well that MCA itself is in danger of being completely irrelevant.

With due respect Helen, precisely this is the reason why Malays find generally Chinese politicians and also segment of Chinese community can’t be trusted. The perception is that MCA does intentionally giving credence to DAP’s slander that Chinese is being targeted by malays.

MCA simply ignores DAP allegation that its relationship to UMNO is time tested based on genuine partnership although everybody knows UMNO holds more influence due its having the lion share of the largest block of voters (Malays). MCA refuses to tell chinese point blank that generosity of malay community does not mean they agree to surrender the much sought after political power.

Which idiot will willingly surrender political power to party that challenges every inch of its aspiration?

I’ve noticed a number of omissions intentionally committed by The Star. Its Chinese readership who are generally lacking in overall perspective will only perpetuate the resentments (hasad dengki) against the establishment, e.g. wrt the allegedly seditious tweet by KGE’s special officer Chan Lilian that Christians are being persecuted.

Hopefully the Malay bloggers will take this up b’cos we’re confronted with a whole slew of English media practitioners – the Rocket Hosanna Chungs working in Star, S’gor Times, TMI etc – who are running their own purposeful agenda.

don’t forget umno acts like a tai-kor when dealing with the fellow commponent parties, bossing them around. the reality is umno is dependent on these parties as it only has 40% or less of the total parliment seats.

how can mca, gerakan, mic tell the rakyat that their rights is assured under them with a straight face, while umno people blatantly do the other?

as for hannah, i notice helen seems to have some sort of obsession over her compared to other pakatan or dap people. sooner or later, her blog prob will have more articles about hy than selangortimes or even the sun. : p
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

It boggles the mind that the English-language media (with the biggest Christian readership as opposed to, say, Utusan whose readers who are not majority Christians) refuse to pursue the story.

This deliberate blackout by M’sian media such as Scissors begs the question — WHY?

As we know, the press in S’pore all come under the umbrella of a humongous media group directly linked to the govt. Hence all the exposes thus far on the scandal receive the implicit sanction of the S’pore authorities.

This City Harvest Church controversy has even been discussed in the S’pore Parliament recently. The charges have been filed in the S’pore court. Statements have been issued by the S’pore police.

Therefore the story is based on highly official sources and most certainly NOT gossip as implied by the Stabbing Scissors — see Star story titled ‘Don’t gossip about case, Christians urged‘.
Really, there’s something VERY SERIOUSLY WRONG with The Star !

Jakarta Post, Bangkok Post, WSJ, BBC and other international media have reported but yet here – we as S’pore’s closest neighbour – our mainstream media are as silent as a church mouse.

Rather than speculation, our press should be contacting the S’pore police and S’pore High Commission to fill us in on the details since Subang Jaya is allegedly implicated.

Heck, the dozing MCA state assemblymen and Parliamentarians should be asking the pertinent questions publicly.

Perhaps the malaysian mainstream or shall we say UMNO media is playing crouching tiger and wait for can of worms to spill whoch wil be eventually shoved into DAP mouth.

But me thinks umno is busy crippling PKR support base among the malays in selangor, sabah and sarawak and rural areas…hence you see br1m and other ETP projects aimed at the rural folks..umno knows the chinese vote this time is not worth the effort since MCA is not helping itself at all.

Helen have you noticed that when you open The Star Online on a Sunday, Joceline’s article is buried under ‘columnists’. You actually have to korek and look for it. There is no icon at the bottom of the homepage even though her column is fresh on a Sunday.

She made a mention of how “everyone knows about the cyber-troopers who stalk the Internet, intimidating journalists who are critical of the party”, and asked:

“Guan Eng’s extreme reaction to news reports that are not to his liking has been a subject of discussion among many journalists. They are wondering whether such extreme responses to issues is coming directly from him or if it is a result of the staff around him”.

If I may take the liberty of contributing a response: “Such extreme responses are mostly coming direct from him, lah”.

The Great Leader is also called Kim not for nothing. And this in his capacity only as chief minister of a state. Wait till he becomes PM to see him at his true despotic potential. Long live Great Leader.

We can’t blame if the Chinese, especially the young Chinese of today, opt for groovy-looking post-modern Churches like City Harvest Church to suit the taste of their inner fulfillment of life.

Confucianism is kind of dead and appears more as zombie-looking Qing dynasty oldie with its long list of filial piety that the young Chinese do not find pleasing to their behaviours and attitudes. For instance, one has to call out names of parents, grandparents, uncles and aunties, before starting a meal (and you can watch this on Bruce Lee My Brother) and young Chinese today would find this rather awkward as to why you should seek permission even to eat, as if eating itself is regulated by a sense of authoritarianism, which to these young Chinese, are rather obsolete and illogical to modern-day practices of freedom and human rights.

Buddhism and Taoism are seen as offering more of consolation of the emotions for stressed-out people, and you can’t dance and sing in temples although you may do so in youth activities carried out in halls of Buddhist organizations, for instance. Christian organizations are rather aggressive in organizing activities of bringing people together for whatever cause, and young people, who like to come together for social and recreational activities, find these activities enjoyable and fulfilling.

So it’s only natural that they see in these Christian organizations places where they make out the sense of their identity, hence becoming Christians is sort of helping them to look up-to-date and modern.

In America, Jewish synagogues are witnessing the attendance of young Jews dropping, the old folks lamenting at this sight, but what can be done – the worship starts after sunset on Friday and which young people want to come for service on a night when they are supposed to be in pubs and night clubs along with their colleagues and peers enjoying the night life with rock music and metallic dances?

About calling out the names of elders (grandparents, uncles & aunties) if they’re seated at the table before starting a meal — I was thought to do that when young but I always considered it a ‘ritual’ of being respectful.

Coming to the present day & the attraction for young Chinese in “cool and happening” Christian socialization, then I’d suppose that to mitigate against this trend, what we should do is strengthen Chinese schools – where they teach Chinese values – rather than weaken this vernacular education stream as the Satu Sekolah group would like to have it.

Youngsters steeped in traditional upbringing (Confucianism) with a stronger sense of self (Chinese heritage) would be less susceptible to the lure of the City Harvests via the mission school ethos.

The Malay desire to un-Sinocize the young Chinese generations with the hope that by this they will become more ‘Malaysian’ may not achieve the desired effect. Brutally pare away our Chineseness & the vacuum is more likely to be filled by the City Harvest- DAP charlatan influences instead.

“The Malay desire to un-Sinocize the young Chinese generations with the hope that by this they will become more ‘Malaysian’ may not achieve the desired effect.”

I do not think that this is what the Malays want at all. Speaking for myself, I would not dream of asking the Chinese to forget their roots, heritage, culture and language. I honestly believe that the Malays of this country have had to push themselves that much harder because of having to co-exist with a significant Chinese majority. I, for one, have benefited from competing with the Chinese while growing up.

However, the issue most Malays have as you know, is the Chinese that wish to remain in their silos, not integrating, not speaking Bahasa Malaysia, purposely speaking in Chinese dialect in front of us so we do not understand, etc.

Why can we not all learn about Chinese culture and values (which would benefit the Malays greatly too), and the Chinese can also learn about Malay culture? Surely learning about each other and growing up together is the way forward. Why are Chinese schools the only solution?

I believe it’s better that status quo be retained for the time being as there is no goodwill between either camps (pro-SJKC & pro-SSS) to move things forward amicably.

Therefore the situation remains a detente although Dong Jong believes this govt holding pattern – i.e. no permits given to build new Chinese schools despite the burgeoning enrolment – is similarly untenable.

However, between what’s pragmatically on the table, viz. Chinese kids being influenced by the Christian evangelists ala City Harvest or the Chinese school ethos, I think the latter will be more conducive for the country’s stability.

The Taoists/Buddhists do not care to hijack Allah and are not the ones on a collision course with the majority Muslims.

Many of the incendiary social conflict issues today in M’sia are between newly confrontational Christians and Muslims, i.e. the DAP trajectory, DUMC, the Bishop Paul Tan/M’sian Insider attitude, the Hosanna Chungs breeding in The Star.

Visually, the contrast is best exemplified in the demeanour of LGE vs CSL during the debate.

I know that the stalemate is not helping to make things any better but the other possibility is that things could get a lot worse with the evangelists in control of the Chinese community.

irony is the chinese school was dying in the 1970s before the government started messing the national school system & mission schools (st.xavier, st.michael, la salle, convent, mgs, etc). parents started pulling out their children to put them in chinese school or if they can afford.. international or private.

even now the number of malay n indian students in chinese school is increasing. my relative often gets request from malay parents to help their children get a place.

the problem is perkasa types and the far right faction of umno are steadfast to want the vernacular school removed because they claim its “against national unity”. they also want other ethnic culture suppressed. they do not see the government’s racially biased policies n their own attitude as a main factor.

to them, the other races are a punching bag for their imaginary fear of losing power, and to scape goat. if you are trying to tai chi their venom toward the english/malay educated chinese christians, it not work. at best, it will back fire.

Wrt to your claim “the Chinese school was dying in the 1970s”, your contention is not supported by the statistics.

Pls click here to see the enrolment figures in SRJK (C) from 1971-1978.

The numbers – sourced from a Cabinet Committee report – recorded 498,311 pupils in Chinese school in 1978 (the link I gave above shows full table) compared to 300,753 pupils in the English-medium primary school the same year.

Doing the math, in 1978, Chinese primary schools had 197,558 more pupils than English primary schools.

In 1980, there were 581,600 pupils in SRJK (C) — see table here, figures 1980-1997.

Now let’s compare the 70s and 80s.

In 1975, SRJK (C) enrolment was 313,060.

Three years later in 1978, there were 498,311 pupils.

Another three years later in 1981, there were 588,300 pupils.

Between 1975 and 1978, the increase in SRJK (C) enrolment was 185,251.

Between 1978 and 1981, the increase in enrolment was 89,989.

Contrary to your assertion that “the Chinese school was dying in the 1970s”, the actual data reveals that the enrolment experienced a greater expansion in the mid-1970s compared to the early 1980s.

In fact, if you’ll look at all the figures in the table throughout the 1980s and 1990s, you’ll find that the saturation numbers had stagnated and this is due to the fact that no new Chinese schools were allowed to be built.

You’re merely repeating a fallacy. The fact is that even in 1971, SRJK (C) enrolment far exceeded that of the English schools.

The enrolment in English primary school decreased by 36,807 pupils between 1971 and 1978 but in SRJK (C) increased by 85,041 the corresponding period.

See also this table showing that in 1971-1978, the enrolment in former English primary school decreased by (-)10.9% whereas the enrolment in SRJK (C) increased by (+)20.58%.

Throughout the 70s decade, Chinese schools were doing better and better while English schools were on the decline.

Even in 1967-70, when English schools were indeed more popular, their increase in enrolment was +5.4% compared to +3.8% for the SRJK (C). So yes, there was this period when English schools were in higher demand but not by much.

“Even in 1967-70, when English schools were indeed more popular, their increase in enrolment was +5.4% compared to +3.8% for the SRJK (C). So yes, there was this period when English schools were in higher demand but not by much.”

perhaps you should make use of statistic from 1960 – 1969? your number on 1967-70 might refer to all, not exclusive for chinese i guess, and we know what happen in 70’s that boost the enrollment of chinese school, no? should dave contention valid if he change the period to sixties?

All the tables referred to (in my reply to Dave) were scanned from Dr Kua Kia Soong’s book, A Protean Saga. The book does not appear to have 1960-1969 enrolment figure table.

Considering that the NEP was launched in 1970, the increase in SRJK(C) pupils over the 1970s makes more sense than Dave saying these schools were dying during that particular decade.

In the 10 years from Merdeka (1957-67), the English primary schools experienced a greater growth (8.3%) compared with Chinese schools (1.4%), probably the only period of time when this trend occurred. However the caveat is that the figures refer to “govt-assisted” schools. Not sure about the number of unassisted Chinese schools unrecorded in data.

Click here for the full table on enrolment in years 1924-1937 in the Federated Malay States (S’gor, Perak, etc).

1924: Chinese school (66.5%), English school (33.5%) out of total 18,312 Chinese pupils

1930: Chinese school (71.5%), English school (28.5%) out of total 31,221 Chinese pupils

1937: Chinese school (82.4%), English school (17.6%) out of total 48,196 Chinese pupils

Click here for the figures re 1941 and 1946, i.e. the immediate years before and after Japanese Occupation (most schools were closed during WWII)

I don’t necessarily support Dave view but he has a point if we look at what undergo at Singapore. There are many Chinese that insist on Chinese education, the number is not that hard to guess, look at the number of student in CIS, 10 to 15 percent the most, I am one. The reason why Chinese school enrollment still sound in the 60’ and earlier 70’ was due to many village and township were with Chinese school only. In fact there are not many Chinese schools in KL and PJ because the demand is not high.

The un-sinocize would have been realized if the government delays the changes of English medium school for another 10-15 years, but I don’t think you could preserve a segregation policy and at the same time expect the non to move to middle ground, unless we embark on assimilation process, or do like American on integration.

The Malaysian Chinese realize we are not that ‘Chinese’ when China started to open up in the 70’ and 80’, there are vast difference in almost every aspect save the language and festival. To assess my Malaysianness via my grasp of BM is irrational if not silly.

“Bangsa Malaysia is real for me because I feel it and I live it.” — Haris Ibrahim, here

The mind of anak Bangsa Malaysia, according to Haris Ibrahim:

QUOTE

“When he hears the racist call to shed the blood of this group or that, or the claims that one group is supreme over others, or has more rights, he asks, if not of the racist speaker, at least of himself:

‘Are we not all human? What is the rationale for this class or group discrimination? Different colour? Different culture? Different religion? Some were here before the others and therefore are more superior? The larger in number are the mightier? Can these factors justify these discriminations?’

“This is the mind of anak Bangsa Malaysia.”

UNQUOTE

The heart of anak Bangsa Malaysia, according to Haris Ibrahim:

QUOTE

“He is greatly burdened by this talk of blood-spilling, by this ‘us and them’, ‘do not like it, get out’, ‘this is our land,your fathers were migrants’, ‘we gave you citizenship’ talk.

“‘These are my people. Yes, all of them. No, not just my clan. All of them. They are my brothers and my sisters. Why would you want to hurt them? How can I just watch as you deny their children what my children have? I love their children as I love my own. Ignore their hunger because they are not of my race, of my faith? What God would have me do that? Not my God. No, I will not let you hurt them. They are my people. I love my people. Yes, all of them. Yes, even you. Please, please stop saying these things. It hurts my people and it hurts me.”

And in another posting titled ‘Are we Bangsa Malaysia enough?‘, Haris challenges his readers, “Until you are prepared to purge the racist and the apathy in you, Bangsa Malaysia will always remain a dream for you.”

Then he quotes Lim Guan Eng:

“Pakatan Rakyat does not believe in BN’s racial politics emphasising an old agenda of “a Malay leader taking care of a Malay, a Chinese leader taking care of a Chinese and an Indian leader taking care of an Indian.””Time has arrived for everyone to take care of everyone, regardless of race, religion and colour,” – YB Lim Guan Eng as reported in Malaysiakini.“

First of all, enrolment figures of SRJK(C) showed that it is the 2nd primary school of choice for some Chinese parents when the English-medium ones where transformed into Malay-medium SRKs in the 1970s. By 1983, the language of instruction in all educational institutions, from primary (except SRJKs) to tertiary, is done in the national language. Many people forgot that the 1979 report was also known as the Mahathir report, and he went on to give us KBSR (1983) and KBSM (1989).

I know supporters of “Chinese” education will always claim that their supposed growth was checked by the lack of new SRJKs and ICHSs in Malaysia. The real truth, imho, is that the “Chinese” education supporters lost the plot on the rationale for early education in the mother tongue. I can accept the need for SRJKs, but I do NOT see any reason to encourage and perpetuate the ICHSs, except as private schools. And like other private and international schools, they should be controlled and limited because I disagree with Dr. Bakri’s thinking that their proliferation is good for the masses.

If the “Chinese” school system is superior in producing results, logic says that the same rigor could be applied to national schools as the difference in medium of instruction was never the deciding factor. What, you mean learning science in Mandarin will make you a better scientist? Any educator worth their salt can tell you that if SRJK(C)s or ICHSs produced more disciplined or respectful students (a BIG IF at that), it is not correlated to the language used for day to day instruction. It is the system, the syllabus, the pedagogy and the teaching and learning environment. Call it learning culture if you like. Our job for people who support a strong national education system, is to encourage better public schools, not private ones. In the mind of many parents today, the choice of schooling is decided by scholastic outcomes, not language of instruction. Having more SRJK(C)s can cater to the present demand of primary education of the Chinese, but having more ICHSs serve no purpose but to perpetuate a splinter education system served by Han Chiang, Southern College, and New Era, not to mention the ones who head for Taiwan. UTAR and KTAR don’t use Mandarin as their medium of instruction.

The f$#king joke of a complete “Chinese” education system as perpetuated by the racists in DJZ and adopted like a moron by the NEC Principal serves to remind us that there are very very idiotic Malaysians among us who could not differentiate between Mandarin-based education and Chinese-based education. To very very very very stupid people, they are one and the same.

I hate to pour more scorn and vilification than necessary, but the truth is that Malaysians have not been served by well-intentioned racists in our midst. MCA have neither the balls nor the guts to check the duplicitious nature of DAP when it comes to “Chinese” education because it has served their own political end and interest in the past. SRJK(C)s are welcomed, ICHSs are not.

As for national language test for citizenship, don’t be daft. No country will take in another as a citizen if it cannot even rudimentarily understand its linguafranca. As it happens, the majority of Malaysians speak Malay. Oh, you can learn English, Mandarin, Tamil, Telegu whatever, but you cannot expect our education to stretch itself to accommodate a particular ethnic group because they “prefer” to be taught in Mandarin from primary to tertiary levels. You can claim victimisation if you are being dumped into the Malay-medium swimming pool without any transitional support or leeway. The truth is, more than 50 years after independence, we really have small justification for SRJK(C)s even.

Singapore never closed down Chinese school but we don’t see one today. My siblings were in national school, I was enrolled into CS because my family moved to a village that has only CS. It is very common during my time for many parents to send their children to different schools, to avoid all eggs in one basket? Some of my cousins even in SMK Buyong Adil Tapah, a Malay school though many prefer English school at that time. My point is trying to correlated back to Nsync comment and his view that “Chinese education supporters lost the plot on the rationale for early education in the mother tongue” thus CS was never the first choice, however and surprisingly, CS becoming more and more popular along the years start from late seventies, we got to respect Laozi when he assert that the most effective course of action is ….doing nothing. When English were relinquished, many abandon NS. DJZ did nothing and CS enrollment increase by leaps and bounds. The revive of CIS come a bit late only when the parents realize that apart from quality (I can agree with Nsync again what sort of quality we talking about), CIS allow you to further study not only to Taiwan but with shorter period as well like I wrote, 6 years versus public school of 7 to 8 years.

I have my debate with Nsync not long ago and I don’t see how we could convince each other pertaining to ‘Chinese’ education, however I have to emphasize that my argument is not solely on ‘Chinese’ but broaden the scope to language, a choice of language (华人与华文教育)，perhaps we are in the same wave length since Nsync did mention Mandarin based education, but why limit this to primary level?

I suppose UPM use English as medium, if we have no issue with English, a America and British university, to teach M&S in English, international and private English school, MMU, Inti, Sunway, Taylor, Monarch then what is wrong with Chinese (Mandarin), Taiwan/China, learn M&S in Chinese(Mandarin), HanChiang, New Era and Southern as long as we learn BM? Do 100% Chinese go to CIS, I don’t think so, perhaps like I said 10-15% so what is the problem? If Chinese don’t work in SMI and MNC, where else they go to, government and GLC? Same analogy apply, if CIS don’t absorb the 10-15%, shall we not create more boarding school, more remove class, more matriculation, more form six and more UiTM?

How loud is DJZ depend on the number of parents decision to enroll their kids into SRJKC and CIS, the parents decision depend on how good is the national school, so why blame DJZ unless we purely want to show we don’t lack introspection, but root cause is still quality education, moreover Chinese school doesn’t exist only after 1957, we should perceive CS as both a legacy and choice, not a small justification I think.

I used to live in Tapah and Cameron Highland and I know many native (Semai) speak poor BM, how? Call them a daft?

The problem we face is that public education is left to rot while private solutions are found for the rich and well connected. Inti, Monash, Taylor’s is not going all over town yelling and screaming discrimination because English is not (one of the) national language. They are also not emotionally blackmailing a segment of the society to support their cause on racist overtures.

Will dissect the matter further when I got more time. I fear we are not making any headway here because the crowd I need to engage is the Chinese education supporters who neither converse in English or Bahasa. I haven’t found a fertile ground for that cross-pollination of ideas. Point me in the right direction and I will resurrect whatever broken mandarin I have to engage.

dear nsync, i more or less grasp where you are coming from, merdeka review do have many articles from the younger generation that condemn the modus operandi of djz, many of them were from djz as well, but I think it take times to change and transform the aged mindset, basically djz is still controlled by a bunch of antique, however most of the young are dynamic and with broader worldview. cheers.

So used to be treated as “emperor” within DAP. Guan eng is unable to accept reality that none outside DAP has high regard for him. They all realise he is there as Penang CM and Secretary General of DAP is simply because he is Kit Siang’s son.

At least for Najib, he earns his post by slowly climbing the political hierarchy in UMNO in graceful steps. He no doubt had a head start, carrying his father’s name, an iconic figure and highly regarded by the malays. But he does not abuse his father’s good name. He earns his position by virtue of being the President of UMNO.

Sometimes only by having power than the true colour of a person is revealed. We only know whether they are humble, magnaminous or childish when they assume power.,

Many said many nasty and unprintable words at Dr mahathir even before him in Friday sermon. But he took it calmly. Nobody went to jail for saying him “firaun” in Friday sermon.

Now imagine saying that to Guan Eng. Or even ask him about his “perceived” affair. no need to figure out. He will cry out loud saying his is cruelly slandered. As if the world revolves around him.

Sometimes I wonder what is it with chinese community that while proclaiming their interest is a matter of life and death (TO THEM) but has no qualm in tolerating useless politician like Guan Eng. A politician whose thinks the only way to survive in politics is by sacrificing the very interest of the community that supports him.

How? By creating imaginery enemy in Chinese mind that their interest are at stake and they are 2nd class citizen. And the result in always predictable. A collision course with the malays.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Shamshul,

Re: 2nd class. Discrimination against Chinese is real. We hear DAPsters reciting a long list of grievances all the time, and some of these are fact based.

However the situation works both ways. Just one e.g: If after 55 years, Chinese still don’t speak the national language but at the same time putar alam insisting that Chinese here actually speak BK better than our mother tongue/English, then this DAPster putar-belit attitude will not help erase the Malay perception that Chinese are still ‘pendatang’.

najib became cabinet deputy minister at 25, and mb of pahang at 29. that is not a head start, that is putting him 10 metres from the finish line. if his dad was not tun abdul razak, he wont have such a meteoric rise.

you forgot when dr m was in power, many people were put into isa for opposing his rule. remember ops lalang, of all things?

i notice it is mostly the pro bn pro umno people who always try to spin things to become a racial issue. they are the ones creating myths the other races is plotting to take over n destroy them. you can read this in newspaper like utusan or berita harian. meanwhile, people like guan eng dont call the chinese to unite against the malays.

I have two questions for you which I ask in all earnesty because I really want to know, not as rhetoric. In your opinion:

1. What do the Chinese in Malaysia currently not have that they feel like 2nd class citizens?

2. If the tables were turned and this was the homeland of the Chinese with Malays as immigrants given citizenship after independence, how differently would we be treated? Better or worse than how the Chinese in Malaysia are currently treated today?

To answer your second question first, I see that in any other country in the world, assimilation is expected of immigrants — be it USA, Australia, Thailand, Indonesia.

Let’s take USA. A Chinese migrating there would very soon be speaking American and with a twang some more (depending on his geographical location). There is no question that a second generation American like e.g. Obama would be speaking English lintang-pukang atau cakap Inggeris bersepah walaupun bapanya orang Kenya.

The children of a migrant Chinese family would respect or even themselves join in the celebration of American ‘festivals’ such as Thanksgiving.

A Chinese immigrant family living in Amerika would not be wise to be criticizing American traditions (say Halloween) or disdaining the locals (whites).

As to how Malays would be treated, I’ve mentioned before to OB (or it could be to Anon) that if DAP had successfully taken power in S’gor in 1969, I think there would be many Kg Buah Pala-like developments affecting the kampungs.

helen, the assimilation is now easier in the west as discrimination is usually legally prohibited. before, with rules like the chinese exclusion act, segregation laws, and other racial laws, race minorities would be in their own ghettos. there is little incentive for assimilation

there is less legal barrier or glass ceiling unlike in malaysia. a punjabi singh with a punjabi name can become a mayor of one of americas oldest towns, for example..

that is not to say there is no discrimination in these countries, it still exist but less than before and the system outlaws it.

meanwhile in malaysia, get a non bumi in pkns and watch the right wingers freak out, even though she can speak good bm
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Your question: “What do the Chinese in Malaysia currently not have that they feel like 2nd class citizens?”

Generally, we do not have a feeling of security for the future or feel we have a safety net or upward mobility ladder that is provided for by the state.

But I can think of a few specifics. In other democracies, DAP’s Ngeh Koo Ham would have been MB instead of PAS’s Nizar. The Perak state constitution has that clause stipulating Malay-Muslim MB, and it’s been reported the other Malay states (S’gor, Johor) possess the same law.

Last I heard, none of the VCs in the many public unis are Chinese. Almost all the sec-gens in the various ministries / heads of govt depts are Malay-Muslim. Ethnic composition of Petronas staff and scholarship recipients too.

However, what the Chinese in Malaysia have that other Chinese (apart from PRC & Taiwan) in the world do not, are Chinese schools.

Since you know that I want Chinese schools to continue, therefore I think the glass ceiling and closed doors are, in part, the price to pay (quid pro quo or trade-off). A number of my kaum kerabat will refuse to admit this but (to me at least) this insistence on Chinese school translates to a sustained desire for remaining Chinese, as compared to turning ourselves into the elusive Firster.

the question is how much the assimilation? the second generation minorities in america speak good english, but they keep their ethnic last name, many work to better improve their rights, many still celebrate their ethnic culture, n there is stronger interest today to learn their ethnic language. their language is used freely. i have worked in san jose and seen many shops with chinese, vietnamese, indian, korean, spanish, portugis signs.

over here for the right wingers, assimilation means nothing less than near total elimination of minority culture, changing names, banning minority language, and… religious conversion. and not to question discrimination, the religious n racial preferences n quotas.

one thing i noticed while working in america, the 1st generation immigrant (the ones off the boat or the plane), are less concerned with fighting for their rights. they shrug off cases of racism and go back to earning their living. but the 2nd & 3rd generation while more “assimilated” are also active in civil rights, labour right, empowerment, n fighting racism.

Are you suggesting that the Chinese and Indians model ourselves on these assimilated tokoh-tokoh media?

or helen ang

no i am not saying they are a model standard. especially not ridhuan tee who has insecurity issues n tries too much to be malay moslem.

the name i mentioned is just an example, but not a definite standard. look at barack obama who has his non white name, not changed to barry obama or benjamin o’banner. or like in the example mr satyendra huda who has an indian name, wears a turban, but is accepted by fellow american to be their mayor.

similarly, we have malaysians with all chinese, indian, eurasian name but would be well assimilated/integrated

——————-(2) Speaking local language well

Ridhuan, yes. Chandra, yes.

you, me, tian chua, hannah, soi lek, guan eng, tee kiet, ling long sek, ambiga, jeyakumar, the punjabi kedai runcit owner down my road, our chinese n indians friends, etc… who can all speak n comm in melay, but still are buddhist, hindu, christian, athist, go to temple, celebrate deepavali, xmas, cny. to me i would say they are more or less integrated/assimilated

——————
(3) “over here for the right wingers, assimilation means nothing less than near total elimination of minority culture”

Aaah, are you referring to Hannah Yeoh?

“Near total elimination of minority culture” – her baby is not Indian, not Chinese by first choice (but still Chinese preferred over Indian) but truly Anak Bangsa Malay-sia! (konon)

Her baby’s name, Shay Adora (not Indian, not Chinese, not Malay), again “near total elimination of minority culture” (?)

Shay Adora, the Anak Bangsa Malay-sia prototype.”

would your parents be eliminating minority culture by naming you ‘helen’?

before we go off the course with your tendency to snipe hy, keep in mind hy certainly doesnt fit the right wingers narrow minded definition of assimilation.. she does not: have the ‘correct’ name, follow the ‘correct’ religion, work for the ‘correct’ political party, and have the ‘correct’ political, racial views
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(1) Barack Hussein Obama — he may not have adjusted his name to Barry (unlike Nikki Haley and Bobby Jindal) but he did bury his ‘Hussein’

(a) do you think he’d have stood a chance to get elected if he was a Muslim and not of the majority faith?

(b) is anyone ever surprised that he speaks English as well as Hillary or McCain? (c.f. one would be surprised if KGE spoke BM as well as Anwar). Has Obama ever addressed his American audiences in an African language?

(2) Communicating in bahasa pasar is not the same as speaking the language well. Is Kim able to speak BM respectably off the cuff?

If she wants to wipe out the Indian & Chinese race identifications, then how can you disassociate her from your “right wingers”? And what about her dressing — see here. Are we all supposed to assimilate & dress like that?

(1) barack obama full name is barack hussein obama II. the middle name is not always mentioned, he didnt drop it. just like bill clinton is william jefferson clinton, ronald reagan is ronald wilson reagan.

10 years ago, nobody believed a black person with a non english name will become president of usa.

When former senator Bob Kerrey – who endorsed Hillary – made a public mention that Obama’s middle name was Hussein, “liberal bloggers slammed Kerrey for propagating a vicious ‘smear’, reminding one and all that multicultural good manners and political correctness are still the single factor that unites Democrats”, wrote Scott McConnell.

Why was mentioning that Obama’s name was Hussein deemed politically incorrect? Recall that during that period, America was at war in Iraq against Saddam, and mentioning Hussein was like a taunt. (Of side interest: Also check out Obama severing his r/s with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.)

McConnell wrote:

“Obama’s backers seem strangely overprotective of their man, as if they can’t conceive how any fair-minded person would not adore him. The few times questions like those raised above have been posted in the comments section of the highbrow progressive blogs, the reaction has been visceral, immediate, strident: it is racist even to mention this stuff, a point pounded home in vitriolic terms.

“The intense repudiation of Bob Kerrey’s rather innocuous observation about Obama’s name and background was astonishing …”

From the Republican POV, white working-class voters most resistant to Obama’s electoral appeal might question his ‘American-ness’. On the flip side, McConnell described the Obama fervor as “the sense that he is harbinger not only of a new America where race doesn’t matter” and thus a candidate “appealing to the Left blogosphere”.

He has head start, yes. No doubt about it. He become Pahang MB, no doubt about it. Nobody is denying that. But did he become President of UMNO by virtue of being Tun Razak’s son?

As for Dr Mahathir putting people under ISA, I saluted him for that. These useless politicians are not angel. They played with racial sentiments. Look around you my dear friend, what happened to Bosnia, Rwanda, Pattani, Mindanao or carnage in Jakarta when thousands Chinese were raped in 1998.

It is Guan Eng that spins and make it racial issue. A call to try Ambiga for treason was purposedly turned into racial issue by Guan Eng. A simple land transaction in Padang Jawa was turned into racial issue. A temple was demolished but nobody was saying about a surau that was also demolished on the very same land.

As for creating imaginary enemy, they are so good into it. They simply reject the call for unity. They refuse a single school system, creating generations of Chinese students who are awkward to communicate with Malays.

quote: “He has head start, yes. No doubt about it. He become Pahang MB, no doubt about it. Nobody is denying that. But did he become President of UMNO by virtue of being Tun Razak’s son?”

shamsul, he already became deputy minister at 25 and mb of pahang at 29 years old by being razaks son. that is already very close to the top, not slowly climbing the ladder as you said.

—————————-
quote: “As for Dr Mahathir putting people under ISA, I saluted him for that. These useless politicians are not angel. They played with racial sentiments. Look around you my dear friend, what happened to Bosnia, Rwanda, Pattani, Mindanao or carnage in Jakarta when thousands Chinese were raped in 1998.”

a lot of people that were thrown into isa were not even playing the race card.. labour union leaders, professors, ngo people, human rights activist, journalist, etc. mahahir and the people in power use that as an excuse to get rid of dissenters.

i have read the pro umno blogs. they call ambiga all sorts of racist names like ‘keling’, ‘paria’, ‘aneneh’ and media like utusan tries to highlight her hindu religion. as usual, its typical of bn to spin things into a race issue.

We can diasgree on the DAPsters, but we need to focus on a very core issue that characterizes DAP’s, as well as Chinese of other groups, including Chinese little ones. Why is it that, even having enjoyed the economic gains in this country, the Chinese in general still have a sense of being a ‘lesser’ Malaysian?

In Najib’s meeting with the Chinese students at UM not too long ago, one student brought up this question – again. One would have considered this question as out of date as it is asked over and over again, but the fact that it is raised in conditions that this question should be seen as outdated means that it has everything to do with how the Chinese feel as being Malaysians in this country – the sense of knowing what it means to be a Malaysian once and for all.

Najib’s reply was, well, certain quarters may feel the Chinese as ‘lesser’ Malaysians, but not the BN leadership. This answer of course is not convincing but even Najib himself, in politics since 1976, has struggled to come out with an answer. He is not alone in this situation. PKR’s slogan of Ketuanan Rakyat may not even offer the answer but it somehow clicks with the Chinese mindset so that when this slogan was mentioned, the Chinese psychology somehow directs itself to it.

Of course this slogan did not immediately take effect, as can be seen in the Chinese support for Mahathir in the 1999 election and the 2004 election for Badawi, but that was because the Chinese were hoping for turns of events that would address this very fundamental question hovering in their minds.

The 2008 is a telling message of this concern and come GE13, it will fortify itself even more forcefully, so that Dear Leader LGE can shout out loud “Shame On You!” as many times as he wants and he will definitely get more Chinese support, not withstanding the Cinta Tiga Segi he is finding himself in.

I remember many. many years ago, an old lady came to me and asked, ‘How is it the govt can give ten scholarships for the Malay students to study and can’t give our kids even one?’ This question is coming from an old lady who lives in a quiet Chinese village and doesn’t know much of what is happening around her. But such a thing can quickly attract her attention, interest, and response. This says a lot about Chinese psychology, isn’t it?

And do not forget how one DAP MP insulted Dr Zambry of being illegitimate child (meaning his parents committed adultery).

Najib became MB by virtue of his official position as Pahang UMNO State Chairman. He was selected as candidate after death of his father. Tun Razak did not put him as a candidate when he was the Prime Minister.

He rose through party hierarchy by winning the posts, one after another. He earns his position.

What about Guan Eng? Why he is the Penang CM? Should not the post go to Penang DAP Chairman? And it must be credible that he became Secretary General and his father the advisor. No wonder people keep calling DAP as “LIM DYNASTY”.

And do not forget how people insulted Dr Mahathir “mamaktir” and many unprintable words.

People can say many things. Just do not go overboard. A government must act. Ambiga I believe crossed the limit. Call a spade a spade. I believe she committed the treason. In some country, she will be beheaded.

Whatever you said about Dr Mahathir, you must accept reality that majority supports him. He won election after election.

I respect him for being blunt, honest and most importantly for sacking Anwar Ibrahim. As a muslim he did his duty. A sodomist can’t be the leader.

shamsul, there is no rule or regulation that says the cm or mb must be the state chairman of the winning party. so far, from what i see in my past few years living in penang, lge has done a decent job, better than his predecesor. the people working in mnc n sme electronics business also mostly agree.

can you point out what ambiga did that is treason? i hear this being said by pro bn people but no real fact is given

regarding your reply to swee leong, what about uitm, matriculation and other educational things that have ethnic quotas? the chinese schools do not prohibit other race from joining. some chinese schools in balik pulau, penang even has over 30% malay & indian students.

the problem is the government say 1malaysia but do the other. at best, the general is saying 1malaysia, but his leftenans is acting the other way.

my malay friends tell me what is going on.. they are lectured not to make friends with kafir, other religion n culture is evil, in btn they are told they are more supreme than others, and newspapers like utusan always tells them the other races plot to overthrow the melayu.

when another race hears about this going on in government biros & linked companies, what does he feel?

Welcome to Shamsul’s world. A good and kind hearted Malaysian but skewed for all that BTN has taught.

BTN was only for civil servants but now we have BTN all over because we rather fight political battles under the pretext of agama dan bangsa rather than that one which concerns truth and reality irrespective of the origin.

Rationality becomes a perception because we love arguing just for the sake of arguing without truth and reality in place.

I am not so sure Dave. My family live in Penang. And the talk of the town is that Guan Eng is paranoid.

As I said again, separate school separates us. That is the basic point. Why can’t we have one school system. Why? Why is it that Malaysia must be the only country on earth with separate school that literally separates us? Why?

As for “..another race hears about this…”

Are you blaming the entire malay race if they are useless politicians among malays, just like there are useless politicians in DAP?

najib gave a diplomatic answer. I hope you are not offended with my remarks. The truth is that Malays in general perceive Chinese ( sizable segment) as “pendatang.

surprise? Upset? Insulted?

May I offer explanation from malay point of view. Malays in general do not trust the chinese or perceive sizable segment of Chinese community as “pendatang” because many of them behaves like “pndatang’.

The Chinese rejects any integration with malays. They insist on separate school, resulting in generation of Chinese who do not come into contact with Malays.

Separate school results in “SEPARATION” literally speaking. When Dr mahathir proposed Sekolah wawasan, many chinese extremists( DJz) are against it. they said it will result in demise in Chinese schools.

And DJZ is against non Chinese teachers( meaning malay teachers) in Chinese schools. Not to mention rampant discrimination in private sector if you ask any Malay professional.

The malays are upset that Chinese keep lamenting they are 2nd class citizens while accorded privileges unheard in other countries. Here Chinese have fully funded separate school and yet day in day out vernacular Chinese newspaper have nothing good to say about “Kerajaan( meaning orang melayu).

Chinese insists on unity but they refuse to integrate in one school system. They complain about DEB . They ask why must we put Race” in official document. But yet they are so willing to endure 11 years study separately. Yet they complain on “one minute” time used to tick race column on official document.

SWEE LEONG,

As long as Chinese tolerate racist from DAP then Chinese must be prepared to accept that Malays perceive them as ” cant be trusted”.

Hua Yong, welcome back in Helen’s blog. Here is the welcoming gift [YouTube]. This is the what BTN has done to America.

There are but a few source of news and information left that are free of government and corporate propaganda for what is has to be when we can take it upon ourselves to dictate what we want it to be for our community irrespective of origin.

No. BTN did not say Malays are supreme as compared to non malays. You lied here.

I knew as I attended its course. what BTN told is why Malaysia is as it is today. It tells about history of the land.

Because of BTN, I am able to answer those who question why there is a specific provision for Malays in the Constitution. But of course there are more stories on Malays . simply because the land was previuosly known as “Tanah melayu’.

As for asking not to befriend “kafir” , check on PAS. For decadeds it went on and on saying UMNO commited sinful acts for alliance with non Muslims.

And please do not turn a blind eye on racism on DAP. It thrives on inciting the chinese not to integrate with malays.

Nobody at City Harvest Church KL in Subang Jaya has been charged with anything. So why should The Star attack it? So that they may attract a lawsuit?

So what if Hannah Yeoh preached there? Dozens, maybe even hundreds of other people have preached at CHC KL. Like almost any other church, CHC KL doesn’t think their own pastors have a monopoly on God’s word. Many of these other people who preached are not pastors, but people who have powerful testimonies of how God came through for them in time of need. Hannah Yeoh was just one of them. So why don’t you propose The Star attack these other people too, and not just a DAP member who happened to share her testimony there?

I find your attempts to link the DAP’s motives to race and religion to be desperate, forced and lacking in any sense of proportion. This is a land where we have had 4 decades of government-sponsored institutionalised racial and religious discrimination. The ruling coalition has component parties with quaint race-based names like United MALAYS National Organisation, Malaysian CHINESE Association and Malaysian INDIAN Congress. And you want to pick on some pattern of perceived Chineseness or Christianness in the DAP which is multi-racial and multi-religious?

You make some vague asides about DAP’s links to big business when there have been numerous documented multi-billion ringgit scandals involving BN politicians. If DAP is really into big business, is Lim Guan Eng richer than Najib or any of the 40+ Ministers in the current Cabinet who refuse to declare their assets? How did BN politicians become so wealthy? Even those who were Civil Servants most of their lives like Najib?

Really, I guess the true, reprehensible function of your blog, paid or not, is to distract Malaysians from the big issues, namely:

#1: Malaysia’s horrific under-performance compared to its potential (seriously, how can we have a GDP smaller than SIngapore’s, despite being 500x bigger, 6x more populated and endowed with everything from light sweet crude to the the world’s largest cave system?),

#2: The impunity with which BN commits colossal crimes (seriously, two bodyguards of the current Prime Minister blowing up a woman they don’t know from Adam and nobody in the prosecution asked them who gave instructions?), and

#3: The deeply entrenched institutionalised racist “affirmative action” practiced here which continues to rip society apart and done nothing for most of the intended beneficiaries – Bumiputeras of all races – but instead enriched BN politicians and their hangers on like the MCA.

(1) Your choice of words is highly revealing in how you frame your intentions.

You start off by saying “Nobody at City Harvest Church KL in Subang Jaya has been charged with anything. So why should The Star attack it? So that they may attract a lawsuit?”

Why do you say “attack”? Is it b’cos that’s the only thing DAPsters know how to do — attack-attack-attack without rationality?

I said The Star should report on CHC-SJ b’cos this church has been implicated by the S’pore media for laundering S$2.1 million.

Just in case you don’t know, S’pore is highly regulated – LKY sues the pants off anyone who dares misrepresent facts – and their media don’t just simply print anything, particularly as (almost) all the media are state-owned, and the ones from which I quoted the CHC-SJ connection reports come under the state-controlled media corp.

In the alleged fraud concerning the charismatic church, the S’pore police have made statements. The pastor and church officials have been charged in S’pore court. The matter has been debated in the S’pore parliament. S’pore ministers, right up to their deputy prime minister, have commented on it.

Therefore as an issue in our neighbouring country, the public discussion is being carried out at levels sanctioned by the island republic’s highest authorities.

Should this issue of the church brainwashing gullible youth be of interest to our Malaysian-reading public? I think so, yes. Why does The Star not think so?

Your claim, about Star attracting lawsuits should they care to put this item on their news menu, does not hold water.

My suggestion for the paper’s coverage was to contact the S’pore High Commission or the S’pore police so that they can get a story. As a media outlet, The Star can do that. As a blogger, I can’t, and will not be entertained by S’pore officials.

Again I ask, nobody and nothing in Subang Jaya’s CHC has been charged with anything by the Singapore authorities, so why should The Star or any other newspaper make a meal of it?

All newspapers, including The Star, have already reported the fact that CHC KL has been linked to the alleged scandal. To go further and to imply culpability when nobody and nothing in CHC KL has been charged would be attracting a lawsuit.

Like you said, Singapore is oh so careful with these kinds of things, so why was the Subang Jaya church and all its leaders been spared prosecution? You can speculate all you want, but the fact remains nobody and nothing in Subang Jaya has been charged by the meticulous Singapore government.

There is a court case going on, by the way. So a newspaper like The Star can go sit outside the Singapore High Comm all day long and not get any more information than that already released. No Singapore official is going to entertain The Star or any other newspaper, please. Do you see any more information coming out of Singapore, other than its Ministers asking for the courts to be allowed to do its job? That’s good advice for you.

“All newspapers, including The Star, have already reported the fact that CHC KL has been linked to the alleged scandal. To go further and to imply culpability when nobody and nothing in CHC KL has been charged would be attracting a lawsuit.”

I’ve not come across any such article in The Star with regard to the S$2.1m funds being laundered through CHC-SJ. Pls provide the url link & show us.

(2) You say:

“why was the Subang Jaya church and all its leaders been spared prosecution? You can speculate all you want, but the fact remains nobody and nothing in Subang Jaya has been charged by the meticulous Singapore government.”

(a) Perhaps any readers who are conversant with international law can help us out here?

(b) Don’t you think what you’ve just said would make a good story for The Star? It can tell its readers that although half a dozen CHC people have been taken to court yet the situation in Subang Jaya is such and such (you assert the SJ church is blameless).

But please prove your (1) claim first, that Star has reported on the money trail.

(3) You further assert:

“So a newspaper like The Star can go sit outside the Singapore High Comm all day long and not get any more information than that already released.”

On the contrary, The Star has reported very little. The latest news is that a mega concert, in which CHC has played a major role the past years, has been cancelled but which Star didn’t carry.

Rather than critically exploring whether CHC is a cult (the church was born in S’pore not more than 2 decades ago and less than 10 years old in M’sia, and is not mainstream Catholic, Methodist or other established denominations), The Star chooses to publish stories like this, ‘Don’t gossip about case, Christians urged‘.

If you were to ask a journalism professor to evaluate the paper’s approach from an impartial news sense POV, he’d say there’s something seriously wrong with The Star for deliberately burying a scandal that is so big in our closest neighbour and which S’poreans have been talking non-stop about (add on: talking with regard to the social impact of evangelism).

All newspapers and websites and blogs which carried the CHC story and described the alleged money trail would have mentioned CHC KL. It was all over the internet in a full and detailed statement by the Singapore authorities. The Singapore Straits Times even made a graphic of it. I really can’t be bothered to trawl through The Star to find an old article, and they could very well be incompetent as you seem to suggest. I really could not care less. The whole world who cares has already read the the alleged money trail went through CHC KL, and since nobody and nothing was charged with anything there, I guess they just left it at that.

And for the nth time, a court case is underway and official detailed statements and court papers have already been disclosed to the public and made available to all and sundry. To suggest any kind of culpability by entities not charged with anything would be inviting a lawsuit. I guess The Star is not THAT incompetent to do something that silly.

The Singapore Ministers have already appealed for all to allow the due process of law to take its course. Why can’t you do the same?

You are shifting the ground. So what if it’s “all over the internet”. The question is why was it NOT in The Star?

My contention is with the Bermuda Triangle (of missing info) wrt The Star as this is a Christian issue – the paper’s demography – and not Utusan‘s.

You’re correct that the Singapore papers explicitly mentioned the money trail through Subang Jaya. This is a major connection as far as Malaysian readers should be concerned and therefore all the more surprising (news angle wise) that Star omitted.

Don’t gimme such a pathetic excuse that you “really can’t be bothered to trawl through The Star to find an old article”. You made an accusation against my writing slant! So back up your claim, please.

Anyone doing an easy Google will find that the Star has only one handful of stories on CHC. So your reason for not wanting to check is hogwash.

If you can’t be bothered now and “really could not care less”, then you shouldn’t have made allegations against me in the first place or to put your comments here.

I do not accept a “really could not care less” attitude — not if you or anyone makes accusations about my blog content and really could not care less to substantiate what you allege (which in this case is specifically that The Star ever mentioned the Sing millions transacted through Subang Jaya church).

That’s the difference between the DAPsters who throw mud and then nonchalantly shrug their shoulders, saying, “Let’s move on” after you’ve thrown mud. And it is precisely this standard method employed by DAPsters to slander which is why I and other critics have such a low opinion of DAPsters.

By the same token, will you permit me to make any kind of claim that I wish to conjure up and then turn around and say I can’t be bothered to provide a link where I sourced the info from?

“So what if Hannah Yeoh preached there? Dozens, maybe even hundreds of other people have preached at CHC KL. Like almost any other church, CHC KL doesn’t think their own pastors have a monopoly on God’s word. Many of these other people who preached are not pastors, but people who have powerful testimonies of how God came through for them in time of need. Hannah Yeoh was just one of them. So why don’t you propose The Star attack these other people too, and not just a DAP member who happened to share her testimony there?”

Once more you appear so clueless about how things are in this country.

While the Christian evangelical movement may be a free-for-all where anyone is allowed preach – and Hannah Yeoh does all the time, in church and outside – it is not the same for Islam here.

Jais, Mais, Jakim, the Sultan and other Islamic state agencies have unequivocally cautioned anyone without accreditation (tauliah) from preaching as well as warned against politicking in mosques.

These restrictions on Muslims would not apply to Christians unless the evangelicals choose to cross the line and invade the mosques.

DAP’s Teo Nie Ching was given a warning letter by Mais and rebuked by the Sultan who is head of Islam in S’gor state for her jaunt in the suraus.

Here we have Hannah Yeoh stating her avowed intention to pay a visit to every single surau and every single mosque in Subang Jaya this coming puasa month.

Given her connection to the City Harvest Church and her reputation for always preaching, I leave it to Muslim readers whether this is a matter of concern or not.

The title of your blog post is “Hannah Yeoh’s connection with City Harvest Church / Reverend’s bogus PhD?” So what is her connection? Christians give testimony to encourage other Christians and also non-Christians. Hannah Yeoh has given her testimony in numerous churches, not just CHC KL. So what is her connection to CHC? She’s Christian lah. All Christians form the body of Christ. Good enough for you?

I have a funny feeling if it weren’t for your obsession with Hannah Yeoh, this CHC KL thing wouldn’t even have even gotten a second look from you. And because of “connection” to CHC, all suraus and mosques should be wary of her impending visit during the month of Ramadan?

I am still waiting for you to tell me what exactly is her connection to CHC KL that makes her such a danger to suraus and mosques, or to anybody else for that matter.

And by the way, all Christians are commanded by Jesus to evangelise which, in case you know, means to “spread the good news” (that man has salvation through belief in Christ). So every Christian (you know, those 2 billion people) is supposed to be an evangelist.

I certainly don’t know of any US-styled “evangelical” Republican-party Christians in Malaysia. Certainly, Hannah Yeoh does not strike me as one, although I wouldn’t know since I don’t know many US Republican party members. I have heard Rush Limbaugh though, and he sounds distinctly different from Hannah Yeoh.

The last time I heard Hannah Yeoh, she was talking about her marriage to a person of a different race and the birth of her mixed-race child. How wonderful. If we all married people of another race, soon we’ll all be the same race.

Just spend a few minutes to read some of Helen’s articles. You’ll notice a few repetitive trends:

1) A tendency to blame Hannah Yeoh in any issue. The article could be about one thing, but Helen will divert half of it to bashing Hannah. If there’s no issue or connection be assured Helen will create one.

2) Blame Christians. She accuses Christians and their western ways of causing the ultra Malay faction to hate on the Chinese as a whole. The irony is these ultra Malay readership do not like traditional Chinese customs, way of life, education, and the race as a whole in Malaysia, don’t care if they are Christian or not. Heck, they don’t even like anyone who is non Malay, non Muslim, or doesn’t suck up to UMNO.

By the way, I don’t hear much from Helen making the same noise about Ren Ci organization, even though they’ve got many branches

3) Brown nosing the ultra Malay faction and their blogs. These people say the meanest racist things about non Malay, non Muslims, sometimes call for a second May 13 but she will easily quote and support them.

Precisely my observations, jonnymalaya. I’m still waiting for Helen to explain how Hannah Yeoh is “connected” to CHC KL besides the fact that she gave her testimony there.

By the way, the tweet of Hannah’s that Helen quoted above, which had the #DestinyOh hashtag, that was in reference to a little baby girl who died 3 days after she was born. Her parents were told of her incurable condition while she was still in the womb, but they decided to carry her to full term and celebrate her very short 3 days of life to the full and glorify God for it anyway. #justsaying

“And you want to pick on some pattern of perceived Chineseness or Christianness in the DAP which is multi-racial and multi-religious?”

Your understanding in this regard is as woefully lacking as in points (1) and (2).

Do I allude to “some pattern of perceived Chineseness” in the DAP? Hardly!

Your off-tracking only hints that you’re coming here for the sole purpose of “attacking” me without any idea of what my writings (a year’s worth in this blog) have been all about.

I certainly do not call DAP “Chinese chauvinists”.

In fact, I think they’re too Western, like the DAP Seremban secretary talking about Athenian principles and Kim Guan Eng spouting a version of Democracy that he himself fails to practise.

[Postscript: Note that China has been a feudal country and is now communist.]

Nope, DAP 2.0 in the persons of Papa and Mama DAPster are more pseudo-omputih than they are Confucianist.

And quite contrary to your [most mistaken] allegation, what I’ve actually been saying is that Chineseness is missing from DAP 2.0, i.e. the new members like Hannah who only joined the party a year before the GE12.

The DAP 2.0 social media stars are Anglophiles who come from a mission school background — e.g. Guan Eng who was English-educated from primary all the way to tertiary in Australia.

I’ve also pointed out Hannah Yeoh’s interview with The Rocket where she admitted that she does not speak Mandarin, and her tweet where she admitted to being “a banana“.

So pray tell, how in the world did you come to your ridiculous conclusion that I’m trying to prove “some pattern of perceived Chineseness” in the DAP?

Precisely because I have read large portions of your year’s worth of blogging that I have concluded you are trying make a multi-racial party seem racially chauvinistic. Not only that, you have been using caricature and name calling in your missives (Kim Guan Eng? Huh?) and you object to my use of the word “attack”? I should be calling you something like Helen of Trolls. By your standards, this is not an attack, right? Just objective argument for the betterment of mankind? Your hypocrisy is plain for all to see.

(4) Now we come at last to the bone of your “attack” which is to cast slurs on me.

You accused:

“Really, I guess the true, reprehensible function of your blog, paid or not, is to distract Malaysians from the big issues”.

To insinuate that my blog is “paid” reflects on the kind of cretin you are, rather than it leaving mud sticking on me.

With people like you behaving so predictably like this, will any sane person consider that I would have a positive opinion of the leadership that DAPsters support?

In what way am I “distracting Malaysians”? My stats counter is public (see sidebar, right). I hardly have 50,000 Twits swallowing my preaching. Readers who pop in here elect to do so only if they are interested in the topics I discuss.

And it’s not like I’m taking up people’s time 24/7 by constantly tweeting throughout the day. On average, I upload a post a day, and not always every day.

So why do you accuse me of distracting readers? Are you suggesting that my readers are so stupid/narrow-minded that they do not read and consider other material just b’cos they spend a few minutes here to listen to what I have to say?

Your parting shot — in the mould of “Helen, why haven’t you talked about Topics A, B, C, X, Y, Z on how bad the BN is” – is so typical. And YOU accuse ME of distracting readers?

The topic of this post is the current City Harvest Church controversy.

But you’re instead asking me about “Malaysia’s smaller GDP than Singapore”, about “two bodyguards of the current Prime Minister blowing up a woman” and about “the deeply entrenched institutionalised racist’affirmative action’ for Bumiputeras”.

Are you saying there are no other blogs / New Media out there talking nineteen to the dozen about how S’pore beats M’sia, about the Altantuya C4 and about NEP?

You want to read about these things, you go to those blogs lah. Why come here? Why distract readers here from the current discussion on City Harvest Church?

I didn’t say you were paid. I was just wondering aloud if you were. It was so strange finding a blog attacking only the multi-racial DAP as racists using caricature and name-calling (“Kim” Guan Eng?) when leaders of the ruling coalition of 100%-single-race-based component parties are referred to by their proper names.

So you have a tiny audience. Aren’t they mostly Malaysians, too? I didn’t say you were distracting large swathes of the Malaysian public. I said you were distracting *Malaysians* from the big issues of government incompetence, government crime and government-sponsored racism.

The last section was completely intentional. Since yours is a blog focused on attacking the DAP through caricature and name-calling, I did your readers a favour by reminding them of the race-based ruling coalition’s incompetence, crimes and obsession with institutionalised racial discrimination.

Just because you have a tiny audience does not entitle you to lack perspective, especially when it comes to national issues like governance and government. With every desperate accusation of racism and scandal hurled at the multi-racial DAP by you, any objective reader will ask why no similar missives on the leaders of our 100%-race-based parties who have a publicly documented list of scandals and videos in flagrante delicto a mile high?

But thanks for alerting me to your tiny audience and intentional lack of perspective. I really should be spending my time elsewhere.

“It was so strange finding a blog attacking only the multi-racial DAP as racists using caricature and name-calling (“Kim” Guan Eng?) when leaders of the ruling coalition of 100%-single-race-based component parties are referred to by their proper names.”

You want me to “attack” leaders of the ruling coalition by referring to them as “pornstar” and “Najis” like the DAPsters do?

And what has ‘Kim’ got to do with race identification? You people are the ones obsessed with race and you people keep browbeating Malays and Hindraf Indians as “racists” for acknowledging that they belong to a certain race.

I don’t recall that I’ve in anyway accused DAP of “racism” as you allege. Can you show me where? And also, you haven’t shown where The Star reported on Subang Jaya church.

You really can’t get away from your vocabulary of “attack”, can you? In fact, you should indeed elaborate on what you mean by my “attacks” on DAP.

DAP has hundreds of leaders known to the public. Do you find the names like Chen Man Hin, Tan Seng Giaw, Teng Chang Kim, Boo Cheng Hau, Fong Po Kuan, Chong Eng, Kulasegaran, Chow Kon Yeow, Tan Kok Wai and others ever mentioned pejoratively or at all in this blog?

Even LKS and Karpal have never been negatively treated in this blog.

And I’ve hardly ever touched on Tony Pua, Teresa Kok and Ronnie Liu who are popularly discussed in other blogs. So what exactly do you mean by accusing me of attacking DAP?

And lastly, about my “intentional lack of perspective” … hullo, I’m not a funded media outlet or organization that I necessarily have to provide a broad perspective on all topics and all issues.

What you read here are definitely my personal perspectives, which at the same time clearly ignores 99.999 % of the DAP public figures (so much for your accusation that I’m “attacking” the party).

The more you say, the more DApsterish you’re making yourself out to be. If you find my perspectives lacking, than I’m in perfect agreement that you should “really should be spending [your] time elsewhere”.

I’m surprised even that you claim to have already “read large portions of [my] year’s worth of blogging”. Golly, what a waste of your time.

You call him “Kim Guan Eng” and you’re not resorting to caricature and name-calling? I should be calling you Helen of Trolls. See how my credibility has gone down 20 notches even when my name calling of you was done subjunctively? And you are doing it repetitively on practically every instance in the case of “Kim Guan Eng”. Cheap. Very cheap indeed.

And since you now claim DAP is trying very hard not to be racists (see above) I am happy to concede that you’re just a cheap caricaturist and name-caller, but not necessarily a racist one.

And why did I read large portions of your little-visited blog before commenting? Because unlike you, I feel I need to get a sense of perspective before saying something. Yes, I may have wasted my time but the obligation is on me to be thorough. Sadly the same cannot be said of you.

And yes, I fully understand the implications of calling your blog an “attack” on the DAP. Your name calling and caricaturing (this word is not confined to cartoon drawings only) is ample proof of that. If you were just making reasoned arguments based on documented facts, and admitting you don’t know where you don’t, there would have been no need to call your blog an attack.

“Kim Guan Eng”? Seriously? Don’t you have anything cheaper to do?

If name calling were just your ‘style’ you would have called all those BN leaders some choice names too. No, your name calling and caricaturing is part of your modus operandi. It is simply to bring DAP and Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng into baseless ridicule, despite their vastly superior performance as the government of Penang and the DAP’s multi-racial platform.

Really? You dare lay a claim that “the obligation is on [your good self] to be thorough. Sadly the same cannot be said of you [Helen]”?

Then provide the link to any Star article that has mentioned the money laundering (police charge) done through the Subang Jaya City Harvest Church, as you claim there is such a Star article.

As for your other claim that “the same [thoroughness] cannot be said of me” — well, if you’ll look up above on this page alone, there are, in my article, 10 embedded links to info source and 5 screenshots. I back up the details of what I write. I cannot say the same of DAPsters.

After trawling through The Star’s publicly available archives, I cannot find the article I thought I read, so I may have been mistaken that The Star cited the CHC KL in its coverage. Happy now?

But then again The Star does not make available to the public its archive of every single story, sidebar, infographic or story-related link. I certainly do not pay money for The Star, so I cannot trawl through last month’s kacang putih wrappers to find the story I thought I read.

Also, as the CHC story unfolded, there were many reports in The Star’s online coverage. And since practically every online report on the alleged scandal described the money trail in the form of a link to the Singapore Commissioner of Charities (CoC) statement (this is where CHC KL was named), I could very well have read that and concluded The Star did in fact report on CHC KL, just that the link was subsequently not archived.

Anyway, I am not the least bit bothered whether an MCA newspaper reports or doesn’t report anything. Certainly, I am not bothered in the partisan way that you are bothered (that an ostensibly compromised organ of the BN should be so bold as to act like a non-partisan real newspaper).

My point remains that the Singapore government, after a 2 year investigation, charged nobody and nothing in CHC KL in Subang Jaya, and thus there was no reason for The Star or any other newspaper to play up CHC KL, especially when a court case was underway and CHC KL bit was common knowledge and already widely reported.

In fact, there has been no newspaper in the whole wide world, as far as I know, which has played up the CHC KL bit. You’re the only one in the world who is “concerned” about The Star’s supposedly under-informed demographic, and that in a wholly partisan MCA way.

And so, back to your headline subject matter: “Hannah Yeoh’s connection with City Harvest Church / Reverend’s bogus PhD?” Yes, please tell us, how is Hannah Yeoh “connected” to all this?

The only thing Hannah Yeoh did was to share her testimony in this church, one of many churches in which she has done so. She preached in a church about God’s goodness in her life, how He called her to public office and her marriage to a man of a different race, and her wonderful mixed-race baby.

What concern is that to you or Jais or Jakim or your Muslim readers or the Sultans or the MCA or the DAP for that matter? For Christians, politics is necessary only as far as it allows us to practice our faith. This world is hardly a place we’re too concerned with. Our concern is eternity. As for Hannah Yeoh’s testimony in church, the only person for whom this is of any concern is God, and I’d daresay he was delighted with His good and faithful servant, Hannah Yeoh.

I think it is relevant. Highly relevant. Just like how Bishop Paul Tan’s “concern” about a new law replacing the sedition act, etc. the specific use of religious figures to influence secular affairs by appealing to their denomination credentials.

We need to be consistent. If Bishop Paul Tan was only ranting away about his flock, nobody would raise an eyebrow. When the religious department tell teachers to watch out for the dangers of Christian proselytization, however, we rightly feel that borders were crossed and the outrage was evident. Is the Malaysian mainstream press treating the minority religions with kid gloves?

The omission of coverage on CHC is surprising because it made its way into the international press and sin chew, nanyang reported them. But the English daily by the name of The Star is perhaps more concerned about offending their readership rather than news reporting. This is not an isolated incident, I am sure.

If people can realize that each press has their own slants, perhaps that is already half way to understanding the perceptions we see traversing in a multitude of directions.

The CHC KL detail was relevant. It was part of an official allegation by the Singapore government and should rightly have been reported by The Star when the story broke as part of the description of the alleged money laundering trail. I thought it was, but perhaps I was mistaken. Why it wasn’t, when it was available practically everywhere else on earth and cyberspace, I don’t know and I don’t care. Incompetence, I guess. Or poor judgment of relevance. Or lack of space on a busy newsday. Whatever.

What I’m disagreeing is (1) that The Star, as MCA’s mouthpiece, should have played it up to play its part in the unethical use of a national newspaper for partisan politics as advocated by Helen in her “election machinery” comment, and

(2) that The Star or any other newspaper should publish a follow up just to make sure there was no story there (e.g. The Star: “Following up on the CHC scandal, in which CHC KL was named in the money laundering trail, we asked the Singapore government for more details on CHC KL but were told to wait for the court hearings. We’ve been camping outside the Singapore High Commission for 3 days and 3 nights now, but we’re not getting any info on this Subang Jaya church implicated in a money laundering scandal. They must be hiding something!!! etc.”) because it would portray The Star as an eager-beaver persecutor of CHC/Christians.

There is a court case going on. Any reporting going beyond the disclosed facts is sub-judice (trying to prejudice the outcome) and liable to contempt proceedings by the court and defamation and other lawsuits by the afflicted parties (in this case CHC KL, CHC itself and all the CHC personnel charged, and perhaps even the entire CHC congregation).

Not only that, given Malaysia’s explosive racial/religious situation, such a story would lead to wild speculation and perhaps even racial/religious tension which I guess would be right up Helen’s unethical it’s-ok-to-use-a-national-newspaper-as-part-of-a-party’s-“election-machinery”-alley. Hey, she said it, not me.

And (3) dragging Hannah Yeoh into this just because she gave her testimony at CHC KL. That’s just daft as well, as I’ve elaborated on this thread.

Not only that, given Malaysia’s explosive racial/religious situation, such a story would lead to wild speculation and perhaps even racial/religious tension which I guess would be right up Helen’s unethical it’s-ok-to-use-a-national-newspaper-as-part-of-a-party’s-”election-machinery”-alley. Hey, she said it, not me.

– MCMK

Precisely the point here. IF the mainstream newspapers are part of the political party’s election machinery, the Star’s behaviour reflects something else altogether. I know we all share the same distrust of mainstream newspapers, but should the healthy skepticism be extended to the likes of Malaysiakini and all those who masquerade behind truth, justice and beauty?

What kind of professionalism has The Star displayed when its reporter (an NUJ president some more) while on the job tweeted “Oi Big Mama” regarding the PM’s wife in Twitter exchanges with a DAP Adun?

Therefore it’s hardly surprising that many readers of this blog see the paper acting like it was a part of the DAP election machinery.

The Star through its blackout and burying of salient aspects of a story (Guan Eng and the DAP’s many gag orders come to mind) has not behaved like an objective media possessing the basic news sense which any Journalism 101 student would have been taught in class.

And puhleez lah MCMK, quit with the DAPster thuggery of calling everyone else “unethical” lah, no integrity lah and putting word’s in people’s mouth … you people obviously do not have mirrors in the house.

You said, and I quote: “MCA must stop relying on the pro-establishment Malay blogosphere to counter opposition attacks against the party and instead compel its own mainstream media machinery to immediately start pulling their weight!”

Newspapers are for reporting the news. Nothing else. If a publication is part of any political party’s election “machinery”, it is no longer a newspaper but a brochure.

When you advocate for MCA to “compel” The Star to “immediately start pulling its weight” to act as the MCA’s “mainstream media machinery” you are in effect asking for a national newspaper to abdicate its proper role and instead take on the role of an MCA salesman.

On the contrary, I’m asking MCA to pull its weight as a member of BN to rein in the newspaper it owns which is behaving like the DAP media machinery.

I’m asking MCA to ensure that The Star is not allowed to get away with burying news items, blacking out unfavorable news, and giving disproportionate coverage to DAP personalities while ignoring MCA, Wanita MCA and Beliawanis office holders as well as Umno’s.

Some senior staff of The Star are clearly unprofessional, as can be seen by their public tweets disparaging Rosmah, the MCA ministers, Rais Yatim and a host of other BN-related public figures.

They tweet during their working hours and while on duty — their tweets describe the assignments they had been sent to cover, e.g. “Oi Big Mama. U r already 70mins late”. This act is a breach of protocol (their terms of service in employment contract).

“Newspapers are for reporting the news.” Absolutely. Such a news as the CHC-SJ alleged by the S’pore authorities to have laundered RM5.3 million is not reported by the paper which is seen as “The Rocket‘s sister publication”.

As for my reference to “pro-establishment Malay blogosphere”, they have reported news covered too by other media like NST, Malay Mail, Chronicle, Mirror, etc but which were glaringly missing in The Star despite the maligned party being an MCA minister or MCA being slurred.

Is this pattern of missing news (that would affect DAP negatively) indicative of a lack news sense in The Star or something else?

Let’s say MCA is the owner of a kedai dobi. Wouldn’t the businessman want to know why his shop is publicizing his rival instead?

You come here to this blog to religiously promote DAP, saying“Malaysians must put aside their ‘considered’ selves and OVER-VOTE for Pakatan”, saying M’sians must change the govt b’cos “BN is beyond redemption”, that you’re “sick to the teeth of BN’s crimes and incompetence”.

It is exactly due to DAPsters putting aside their ‘considered’ selves that they’re now rampaging like Mao Zedong’s Red Guards.

While you have stridently urged voters “to get rid of BN”, I on the contrary have never in this blog promoted any party (be it MCA, Gerakan or Umno) to be preferably voted. In fact, I replied readers several times that I’ve never voted BN and do not intend to in GE13.

And unlike you, I’ve never dissuaded readers from voting any party pinpointed (be it DAP or whichever) either. And I’ve defended DAP leaders like Kit Siang and Boo Cheng Hau. Have you ever defended any Umno leaders? Are you capable of that?

As I’ve proven to you in a previous comment, 99.999 % of DAP leaders are not mentioned either at all or disparagingly in my blog.

Unlike you, I do not make sweeping statements that everyone in DAP is bad.

Now compare you. You have written, vote election candidate “who has a track record of upholding the Rule of Law. Oops, that excludes most of BN. Too bad then.”

BN is a big coalition, not just Umno but consisting the Sabah, Sarawak parties and small parties like PPP.

What do you know about them that you can so confidently declare responsible lawmakers “excludes most of BN”?

You are so imbalanced that you see BN as only black and DAP as white, and you come preaching to all of us from your high horse when the pseudonym you’ve chosen – Makin Cuci Makin Kotor – is reflective of the spinning you’ve been doing here.

So puhleez lah, you’re the last person fit to be thundering about ethics and to accuse me.

Here’s another one of your unethical quotes, found in your Muhyddin-slapping-the-MCA-around story, suggesting that The Star was to be reviled because it was “not pulling its weight” as part of MCA’s “election machinery”:

Quoting Helen: “MCA is behaving in a similar Profit-seeking First way. It wants to be given seats to contest but not pulling its weight. The media is part of any election machinery but the MCA paper cannot be relied on by BN.”

Newspapers are for reporting the news. A publication that promotes a political party is called a brochure.

In your quote, you are suggesting that a newspaper that refuses to become the puppet of a political party be reviled.

In my quote, I’m suggesting MCA curb The Star‘s money-mindedness that last Ramadan saw the paper taking in an advertorial (collecting ad revenue) for Pork Ribs and putting the pictures of pork dishes in its buka puasa restaurant feature.

In my quote, I’m proposing that MCA deal with its paper’s DAP-promoting inclination so that there is no sabotage of BN during the election campaign. Imagine a scenario where its DAP-supporting staff tweet ‘Big Mama’-like comments during their assignments and these comments get widely circulated in the alternate universe of social media.

Last, your ranting about ethics is most tiresome as you’ve shown yourself to be the last person possessing it.

If you were so concerned with the legitimacy of The Star as a newspaper as a result of its (alleged by you) partisan pro-DAP reporting, you would have asked it to stop ALL partisan reporting.

You would have said something like: “Yo, The Star, stop promoting DAP and act like a proper newspaper.”

But no, what you did was accuse The Star of being pro-DAP and then recommend that it be made pro-MCA instead, through the mysterious and no doubt gentle persuasion of its owners and paymasters, the Malaysian CHINESE Association or MCA.

If that is not unethical, I don’t know what is.

As every ethical person knows, a newspaper is for reporting the news and nothing else. If a publication is used to promote a political party, or anything else for that matter, then it is nothing but a brochure and should be treated as such.

For example, the DAP publication “The Rocket” is clearly a brochure and makes no bones about it. In this case, since you are advocating The Star become a brochure for the MCA, then it should be called “The Pocket” or something similar for readers to distinguish it from many genuine newspapers around the world called The Star or The (Something) Star.

But lest you again say I’m putting words in your mouth, let me quote you, in full paragraphs:

Quote 1: “MCA is behaving in a similar Profit-seeking First way. It wants to be given seats to contest but not pulling its weight. The media is part of any election machinery but the MCA paper cannot be relied on by BN.”

Quote 2: “MCA must stop relying on the pro-establishment Malay blogosphere to counter opposition attacks against the party and instead compel its own mainstream media machinery to immediately start pulling their weight!”

Are you one of those Firsters so uncomfortable in your own skin that you must continually harp about the ‘C’ in MCA/Malaysian CHINESE Association?

Bottomline: MCA is owner of The Star. The party also faces the very real prospect of political annihilation. A vehicle/weapon of the MCA destruction would be its own senjata makan tuan. MCA has not managed to get the ear of public opinion over the last 5 years despite it owing a large circulation newspaper.

As I’ve said, The Star is profit-motivated and writes what its readers in Damansara Utama and Subang Jaya want to hear so as to sell copies and please big advertisers (e.g. property developers).

Utusan, as a comparison, does not have the same business orientation of The Star and is suffering its sales plummeting by maintaining a pro-establishment (coinciding with Umno-Malay ketuanan) slant despite the changed political climate post-2008.

Media around the world endorse any political party they want. Look up all the major UK, US papers. In the run-up to the elections, they will openly support candidates — say Obama, or H. Clinton (in run-off) or the Tories or Labour.

The Economistis even more opinionated: “This newspaper endorsed Mr Sarkozy in 2007″, “The Socialist who is likely to be the next French president would be bad for his country and Europe”.

So the fact is that newspapers do choose sides, only just don’t be partisan to the extent of false reporting or putar-belit like DAPsters are fond of doing, and like you’re wont to do.

The reality of the situation is that The Star is functioning as a successful business (which it is) and somewhat keeping up its sales (despite the inevitable dip) as well as collecting the ad revenues which gives its shareholders profits and its editors, fat bonuses.

Is the reality of the situation also that The Star is MCA mouthpiece and party organ?

Pragmatically, if the MCA via Huaren Holdings (the party investment arm) is paying the reporter salaries, then why should they allow the editorial staff – with the exception of those at the very top like Datuk Seri WCW, Datuk WSW, JC & a handful of others – to badmouth the boss (MCA and by extension its Ministers) as well as to covertly promote & publicize the rival (DAP)?

If Star was neutral and objective to begin with, then I have nothing to fault the paper on.

But if Star is seen by many readers here as a Rocket sibling, or S’gor Times cousin and its biases hurt the interests and even threaten the very survival of its owners, then shouldn’t MCA stop being a foolish cuckold (Salhas’s comment: “The Star’s eclipsing of CSL is like your wife shutting you out of the house while she’s having a liaison with your sworn enemy. How sad!”

“This is a land where we have had 4 decades of government-sponsored institutionalised racial and religious discrimination.”

– MCMK

You are aware that the statement above is not only patently false, but to call it an exaggeration would be granting you way too much lee-way. Deviations from the Constitution I can sympathize with, disagreements over what our forefathers put down on paper I can’t. In addition, PR is using exactly the same BN/Alliance formula of ethnic elite bargaining.

If a donkey comes up to you and say that it is a horse, you don’t just take their word for it. I mean, if it looks like a donkey, smells like a donkey and walks like a donkey, it is most probably, you know, a donkey. DAP can call itself a multiracial party with socialist learnings, but that is like Gerakan and PPP calling itself a multiracial party.

Dude, this is a land where we have had 5 decades of imbalanced growth and worsening polarization. Crying victim here would be like those Iphone, Ipad and all those tree-huggers activists against Lynas as they tap away on their rare-earth laced products. Discrimination? Wait till you speak to our LGBT friends and the oppressed denominations that doesn’t start with Christ…

(1) Forefathers: To help me, please cite the relevants parts of the original 1957 Constitution. I do not challenge the fact that there are specific provisions giving Malays and Islam special rights in this country. However, my contention is that the NEP of 1971 was a gross and supposedly temporary amplification of those rights which subsequently became a permanent ever-growing larder of funds to be plundered by UMNO and its hangers on all in the name of “affirmative action”. Also, I have read parts of the Reed Commission’s notes and the Malay special rights were needs-based (due to the economic backwardness of the Malays at the time) and were initially due to expire in 15 years. Not genetics-based and to last for eternity.

(2) I do not doubt that DAP is majority Chinese and I do wish it would tell us exactly the breakdown on Indians, Malays and DLL. However, for 100%-single-race (constitutional or genetic) parties like the trifecta of BN to knock DAP for being Chinese is just daft. Anyway, we have Helen here who claims DAP is bending over backwards not to appear racist (and by that I suppose it has to be both word AND deed, otherwise who’s to believe them?). So I’m bamboozled both ways.

(3) I completely agree with you about the 5 decades of imbalanced growth and worsening polarization. I am attributing it to the 4 decades of abuse of the NEP by an incompetent and criminal government, but you have not ventured any cause. What do you think? I am all ears. And I am sympathetic to the plight of the oppressed groups you mentioned.

I will start by correcting some misconceptions on your part. Firstly, there is no such thing as a “original 1957 Constitution” unless you are referring to the Federation of Malaya. While the current Constitution of Malaysia that came into force in 1963 (which also included the Malaysia Bill) can trace its roots to the recommendations under the Reid Commission, many things did not make it into the final document. And do bear in mind of the various amendments and changes after 1969. The fact that you used the word “special rights” for “Malays and Islam” reflected the lack of distinction in your mind on the special position of Malays and Bumiputeras as well as the status of Islam as the religion of the Federation.

Do bear in mind that a Constitution spells out the limits of the Government to protect the interests of the people against the tyranny of rulers, democractically elected or otherwise. I totally concur with you that deficiencies in government policies, plans and programmes, in particularly the execution of certain initiatives like the NEP, have led to an entrenchment of the political economy of patronage – resulting in wastage, corruption and systematic elite looting. But if you think NEP or UMNO alone was responsible, you are most certainly misguided. An extension of the NEP WAS discussed and debated, and only right-wing Malays think that it is a “right and priviledge”, rather than as a handicap as stated by Tun Dr. Ismail.

The reason why some of us, those who have nothing but disdain for the communal politics practised in this country, and disgust at the exploitative collusion among those in the corridors of power with big businesses, but are still NOT going the ABU-way, the facts are simple – you do not judge a team’s performance by what it COULD have done, you judge them by what it HAS done. BN falls short in many areas, and I am not interested in defending an alliance on its way out of power. But before I can be convinced that PR is a viable alternative, I will evaluate BN’s performance by what it has achieved, warts and all. We paid a price for the development we enjoyed today, and while some prefer to depict the ruling coalition as a total failure, facts showed otherwise. We are all elated by what a new political scenario by PR can promise to bring, but for those of us who observe the tides from the sidelines, a huge dose of reality is needed.

This is where DAP and PR comes in. The job of politicians is to sell themselves to the people that they are able to govern, and perhaps more importantly, they are able to govern better than their opponents. That is why it is so hard to dislodge ruling coalitions unless they face internal divisions. You seem to have a problem with “100%-single-race” parties, but that’s not a perception shared by our forefathers and the generations before us who voted them into power. I posit to you that even if BN register itself as a new multi-racial party tomorrow and dissolve UMNO, MCA and MIC, you would still not be supporting BN, and you shouldn’t. Why? The truth is because the problem with BN is its entrenchment withing the system of governance. The inter-racial equilibrium in the elite bargaining system was distorted with the dominance of UMNO, but the real problem here for many Malaysians is how UMNO wields extraordinary force on the wheels of governance, unchecked and unfettered.

DAP draws its support from the Chinese-based population, that’s the truth, and in fact, that’s why the PR coalition is working. If DAP was going at it alone, it would never have reached its current level of success. We should watch Kedah, Pulau Pinang and Selangor closely. Forget Kelantan, nothing is going to change there. You see, the three states above will show us how the PR coalition will balance their party goals for a common good. So far, it doesn’t look too pretty. Wishing DAP to reveal a breakdown of its members by race is futile because its state and central line-up of leaders have already betrayed the nature of the beast. DAP is telling everyone who would listen about their Malaysia First plans, not unlike Najib peddling his 1Malaysia. The truth, however, is that the firsters are proving themselves to be duplicitious anglophiles who talks about being Malaysian only when it suits them. Shay Adora Ram’s episode was so illuminating that it boggles my mind to think about what lengths Hannah would go to in exploiting a non-issue.

This same “incompetent and criminal government” has developed the country without letting it implode. The job gets harder of course, and to say that the government was static and unresponsive to the global realities would be untrue. Every politician worth their salt knows that they need to grow the economic pie to keep everyone happy, and with money, the people can tolerate a lot, even authoritative and paternalistic governments like Singapore down south under LKY.

Yes, with BN at the helm, the civil service lost its luster and federal institutions were weakened by Mahathir. However, we still have a lot of good men and women in the government who is trying to keep this country chugging. You may think they are not doing much, but do separate your attacks on BN with the civil servants because PR will one day have to work with them too. If our politicians are bright, they would not have been politicians but carve a living out of something more tangible with their lives. If they were great accountants, entrepreneurs, lawyers and doctors, it also does not mean they will make good politicians because the set skills required are not exactly the same. We need a mixed bag of technocrats, commoners and elites. At this point, PR is attracting the right talent. With time, hopefully, it can become a viable alternative, that’s if their internal differences do not become too great. Malaysia desperately needs a two-party system for check and balance.

Point being, we must be fair in our assessment and judgement, and not let irrational prejudice blind us to the lessons learnt in our foundations of national development.

Thanks for clarifying on the Constitution. Yeah, I took some shortcuts when describing it! And yes, I know of these important distinctions you pointed out, but I have put them on the backburner as they don’t seem to have hindered the BN from ignoring, amending, steamrolling over and misinterpreting them in any way they want.

Also, I am fully aware that the Constitution’s role is to protect us from the Executive, but in practice it seems to be doing nothing of the sort. This tattered and 700x amended document has been debased beyond all recognition and the only way to restore the authority of the Supreme Law of the land is to get rid of BN.

Over the past few years, and even more so in the past few weeks and months, BN has been relentless in its efforts to spew contempt for the Rule of Law in this country. Hardly a day passes without some lawless thing being said or done with impunity by a member of the ruling coalition.

I have come to the conclusion that BN is beyond redemption in its current form, and a change, even a materially flawed one, is better than allowing BN another 5 years.

Thanks also for your highly considered views on the current political landscape. It is comforting to find someone like you in this blog who can think so deeply and is able to articulate his/her views without fuss.

Technically, I am in agreement with your views, even those critical of PR and the DAP, but there is a practical problem which throws a spanner into the works – cheating – which you have not addressed.

Once cheating is taken into consideration, I believe there is no more room for highly considered candidate-by-candidate issue-by-issue evaluation of BN vs PR. It has become an all-or-nothing battle.

I don’t for a moment doubt that very large scale cheating has taken place, and is going to take place in GE13. Just the gerrymandering alone, which is a documented fact beyond any conjecture, is off-the-charts. Constituencies have been progressively mutilated by the EC so much so they can differ by a factor of 20x, with BN oh-so-conveniently winning most of the “low-voter” seats.

Someone has actually calculated that with our current constituency boundary delineation, a party or coalition can attain a simple majority in Parliament with only 18% of the popular vote by winning all the “low-voter” seats. If this is not a travesty, I don’t know what is. It is also a mathematical certainty that if all constituencies were the same size in GE12, BN would have been soundly trashed.

When gerrymandering is added to the other GE irregularities like instant citizens, phantom voters, dubious postal votes, BN’s media monopoly, the abuse of public institutions, etc. I am inclined to think that BN already has 30-40 seats “in-the-bag” through cheating alone.

Thus for change to happen, Malaysians must put aside their “considered” selves and OVER-VOTE for Pakatan, to counteract the effects of BN’s cheating. Come GE14, when cheating has been hopefully expelled from the electoral system, we can go back to our considered selves, and scrutinise manifestos and CVs, and weigh issues with a fine tooth comb.

Helen, tak payah nak layan dia nie. Although you have rebutted solidly, we all know the type kan? Stuck in an echo chamber of Mkini commenters who only hear what they want to hear. How did someone else put it? ‘In a state of perpetual hysteria?’ I wouldn’t be surprised if this guy belongs to the CHC cult.

Haha, I am not a Malaysiakini subscriber nor in CHC, nor DAP nor Pakatan or anything. I am that most dangerous of people, the exponentially growing ranks of the ORDINARY RAKYAT who is sick to the teeth of BN’s crimes.

“I am not a Malaysiakini subscriber nor in CHC, nor DAP nor Pakatan or anything. I am that most dangerous of people, the exponentially growing ranks of the ORDINARY RAKYAT who is sick to the teeth of BN’s crimes.”

Hahaha…funny how Kim Guan Eng’s loyalist, Makin Cuci Makin Kotor has his panty in a bunch when the table is turned on DAP’s own game. Where was he when Pakatan cybertroopers initiated the name calling game? Changing Lim to Kim is mild compared to Lim’s camp associating journalists with the oldest profession in the world.

I’m nobody’s loyalist and I have not called anybody names, and I am not going to bother playing silly tit-for-tat name-calling games with anybody. There are far more important issues at hand like the collapse of BN and the end of race-based politics.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You have not called anybody names? “Helen of Trolls”? “a cheap caricaturist”? I wonder who said that? — Helen

Like I said, “Helen of Trolls” was subjunctive (an “If … then” in case you or your readers don’t know). I was using it to illustrate your cheap caricaturing and name calling which passes as political commentary in your attacks on the DAP and especially Lim Guan Eng. I did not say, “Yo, Helen of Trolls, you’re a cheap caricaturist.” I said, to paraphrase, if calling Lim Guan Eng “Kim Guan Eng” is what you do and it’s ok, then perhaps I should call you Helen of Trolls.

Well, words may said no. But traits, certainly of Kim’s posse. I’m happy with race-based politics, thank you. Better be truthful than trying to pretend a pseudo-liberal..:-) Important issues of the moment are looming water shortage and having regular rubbish collections. Go solve them, I give you a brownie point.